Post navigation

As a country, are we getting bulkier? And for once, this is not in reference to the rising obesity epidemic. Today, we’re talking grocery shopping in bulk, convenience and of course – food waste.

A modern approach to grocery shopping frequently involves the purchase of food items in bulk. More shoppers are joining wholesale clubs where the grocery carts and the receipts seem to be getting larger every day.

Why are so drawn to these big stores and seemingly “bigger deals”?

Purchasing items in bulk and stocking food at home relates to both over-purchasing and the inability to manage food once it’s stocked at home (Porpino, Parente, & Wansink, 2015). Often items are purchased in such large quantities that they cannot be used up before going bad. Furthermore, shopping at wholesale clubs and purchasing bulk items seems to underpin over-preparing food – which then leads to more food waste (Porpino et al., 2015).

Evidence shows that this practice can be influenced by increased storage space (notably, larger fridge and freezers), convenience, and of course, interest in saving money (Schanes, Dobernig, & Gözet, 2018). Whatever the motivation, this practice can unfortunately contribute to household food waste.

Let’s take a closer look at how and why this behavior occurs.

Convenience

Let us first consider the perceived convenience of shopping in bulk. In North America, we tend to reserve our grocery shopping to a once-weekly activity. This involves planning ahead and is typically viewed as a chore to be completed as efficiently as possible. When shopping for the next 7 days, we may overestimate how much food we actually need – resulting in the creation of our very own stockpile at home. When deciding how much of an item to purchase, we tend to use the “better safe than sorry” motto and purchase a little more than we might need “just in case”.

Although stockpiling food for unexpected occasions is seen to reduce stress and save time, it can result in over-purchasing products that will not be used up before going bad (Schanes et al., 2018).

Cost savings

Over-purchasing and buying in bulk may also have an economic motivator. There exists a widely spread assumption that promotional offers such as “buy one, get one free” encourage consumers to purchase more than they had initially intended, and likely more than they actually need (Schanes et al., 2018). Porpino et al. (2015) found that strategies typically used to save money – such as buying items in bulk – end up generating more food waste. This consequential food waste ultimately mitigates any savings incurred during the purchasing phase.

Furthermore, surveys have shown that consumers often attribute food waste to the large package sizes food products are sold in. These larger packages are not suitable for smaller households but the alternative – smaller packages – are comparatively high in price. One survey examining reasons for household food waste found that 20-25% of food waste was reportedly due to overly large package sizes and difficult-to-empty packaging (Schanes et al., 2018).

Finally, discounted food may carry a reduced perceived value. Because something was either purchased on sale or else as part of a bulk deal, it may be valued less by the consumer. This may result in it being wasted without as much concern as would be attributed to a more expensive item.

Fear of Running Out

An additional motivator for this behavior may be a fear of running out of food. As discussed in a previous blog post, the good provider identity compels individuals to maintain a full fridge, freezer and pantry as well as to prepare extra servings for a dinner party to avoid not having enough food (Visschers, Wickli, & Siegrist, 2016). The fear of running out of food often results in over-purchasing as well as over-preparation and thus, increased food waste. However, there may be more to it than just that. Part of the reason why we stockpile food may also be due to an interest in maintaining an appearance of abundance. For some, a fear of food insecurity may run deep, resulting in keeping more food than necessary at home.

All of this begs the question: is none better than two-for-one when it comes to reducing food waste?

Ahhh, compost. The long revered alternative to throwing food in the garbage. Once known only to the most enthusiastic environmentalists, this practice is now becoming increasingly mainstream.

As awareness of food waste grows and municipalities across Canada begin implementing green bin collection programs, it is interesting to consider the implications of composting.

For those less familiar with the topic, composting is the process of breaking down organic matter and transforming it into nutrient rich soil. The result is a valuable product that has wide agricultural use. It is a vastly preferable alternative to sending uneaten food to landfill.

However, some studies suggest that it may not all be good and green. Cue: the compost paradox.

In a study conducted in the United States, 41% of composters indicated that because they compost, discarding food does not bother them. Given their existing practices, these individuals felt less concerned and less guilty about the food they wasted (Neff, Spiker, & Truant, 2015).

It seems the paradoxical consequence of persuading people to do something good for the environment can result in them feeling like they are already “doing their part” and therefore do not need to make further pro-environmental efforts. The concern here is whether composting can result in greater food waste generation.

In this context, it is also worth considering the fluidity and socio-cultural variability in foods that are perceived as waste. Perhaps the saying one person’s trash is another person’s treasure does not wholly apply here; however, perceptions of what is waste do vary. Some may argue that ultimately, if food is not consumed by humans (arguably, its intended purpose) then it is waste, whether the spoiled food is composted or not.

It is not yet clear whether viewing composting as an option for uneaten food increases food waste generation. However, the topic is a good reminder to “dig a little deeper” into some of these greener solutions and as always, highlight prevention of food waste over diversion.

In 2018, we see the issue of food waste making headlines almost daily. Although there is still work to be done in building awareness and teaching food waste reduction skills, this topic has been receiving far more attention lately than in previous years.

However, there is one industry that seems to have preceded recent trends. The restaurant industry, as well as regional cuisines, have historically been based on efforts to reduce food waste. And both seem to have similar motivations.

First, let’s consider the restaurant industry. It’s no secret that restaurants are well-known for their narrow profit margins and extensive competition. For this reason, restaurants and chefs have been quick to prevent food waste in their domains. It couldn’t be clearer in this context: wasting food is equivalent to wasting money, shrinking profits and reduced competitive edge. From this culture of thrift, we see the emergence of creative and tasty dishes featuring ingredients recreated in novel and surprising ways. And to think, we pay good money for these food scraps!

To a greater extent, regional and then national cuisines have long served to absorb and re-imagine by-products from the food chain. Many great cuisines are built on using leftovers, eating with the seasons, saving money and cooking with scraps. Thriftiness, it seems, has traditionally been the foundation of many great cuisines.

If not for thriftiness, how might the British have come up with the traditional “bubble and squeak” meal? For those unfamiliar with this dish, it is made from potatoes, cabbage and leftover vegetables typically originating from a roast dinner. Combined and fried, this is a tasty and traditional way to use up leftovers.

In fact, many countries have their own version of this British staple. Although they are found under different and increasingly difficult to pronounce names (rumbledethumps from Scotland, anyone?), these dishes are similar in both their ingredients as well as their quick and simple preparation steps.

For centuries, out of both necessity and sometimes desperation, our ancestors have come up with creative ways to re-imagine food. Today, we give these cooking techniques trendy and catchy names like “nose-to-tail” or “root-to-fruit” cooking. However, historically these methods have been simply known as “cooking” and were seen everywhere, not just in restaurants.

So, for both restaurants and cuisine, reducing food waste seems to be more of a tradition, rather than a trend.

To learn more about creative leftover ideas and how to make bubble and squeak at home, visit the love food hate waste UK website: https://www.lovefoodhatewaste.com/recipe/bubble-and-squeak

Food waste can be a challenging topic to study. From difficulties in quantifying food waste to estimating its impacts, a consistent point of discussion in the literature is defining the terms used to study food waste.

Among most parties working on this issue, there is typically a distinction made between “food waste” and “food loss”. Although the definition of these terms is not universally agreed upon, Thyberg & Tonjes (2016) defines them as follows:

Food Loss: “A decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption.”

Generally speaking, this is an aspect of waste generation that as consumers, we are less likely to contribute to. Food loss is typically driven by infrastructure limitations, climate and environmental factors as well as quality, aesthetic or safety standards. Food loss most often occurs at the production, post-harvest, and processing stages of the food chain.

Food Waste: “Food which was originally produced for human consumption but then was discarded or was not consumed by humans. This includes food that spoiled prior to disposal and food that was still edible when thrown away.”

Food waste typically occurs at the retail and consumer level and is driven by decisions made by consumers and businesses who consider quality, aesthetics and/or safety standards. Food waste as defined here is more directly linked with consumer behaviour.

It is interesting to consider whether these two terms elicit different responses. Does one evoke a feeling of guilt more than the other?

I personally associate a more negative connotation with the term “waste” versus the term “loss”. Loss implies a lack of control over the issue and therefore, a lack of responsibility. However, using the word “waste” more directly implies responsibility. What I hear in this context is that loss is inevitable, but waste should be avoidable.

And yes, food waste to a great extent is avoidable. However, are evoking feelings of guilt through the naming process effective in improving consumer food waste behaviour? In this case, we must consider whether the negative connotation promotes more conscientiousness about the issue or whether it discourages engagement.

Some have attempted to offer alternative definitions by, for example, substituting wasting with “discarding”, a term that is thought to reduce implied judgment among consumers (Neff, Spiker, & Truant, 2015).

My question to leave you with is this: Would we feel less guilty about losing, discarding or wasting food? And more importantly, does how we define a term actually impact subsequent behaviour?

Did you know that approximately 2/3 of the food wasted in Canada is fruits and vegetables?

This statistic is all the more surprising when we consider how highly we value fruits and vegetables for our health. Although healthy eating fads come and go, most healthcare providers can agree that a diet rich in fruits and vegetables can help to prevent various chronic diseases.

With this advice in mind, we eagerly reach for the colourful array of produce available at our local grocery store. However, without proper meal planning and storage techniques, it is unfortunately far too easy to let this healthy food go to waste.

Experts often blame the perishability of fruits and vegetables for their tendency to be wasted. However, it seems this topic may be far more complicated.

Over-provisioning, or purchasing more food than is necessary, is common and often occurs when shopping for produce. Which begs the question: why do we engage in this behaviour?

The most commonly discussed theory in the literature is that of the “good provider identity”. The good provider identity is a desire to provide an abundance of food that is both healthful and liked by the family (Schanes et al., 2018). This is a noble inclination indeed, but one that often results in food waste when too much of a particular item is purchased.

Another concept is the “compensation effect”. This occurs when an individual consumes a meal that is perceived to be unhealthy, then purchases an abundance of healthy and perishable food the next day to compensate for their unhealthy indulgence (Schanes et al., 2018). Although purchased with good intentions, this perishable food is often wasted.

This scenario certainly felt familiar to me! After a particularly unhealthy meal out, it is natural to be drawn to the healthy array of produce available at the grocery to help counteract yesterday’s meal, whether or not you have the time or interest in consuming all that you purchase.

Other factors that may contribute to the over-purchasing of fruits and vegetables include differences in taste among family members, attempts to stockpile food (often done when produce is on sale or when perceived future time constraints are present), bulk purchases, and over-sized packaging. Additionally, concerns about food-borne illness and a desire to eat only fresh foods also provide rationale for discarding produce that is perceived to be beyond its best before date.

Finally, although composting is an excellent way to handle unavoidable food waste (such as banana peels, chicken bones etc.), it can serve to undermine individuals’ motivation for waste prevention. Composting should be seen as a last resort, rather than as a way to mitigate the negative consequences associated with food waste.

So, what is the solution?

We can prolong the shelf-life of our healthy fruits and vegetables by buying only the fruits and vegetables that we need, storing them properly and keeping them visible in our fridge so that we don’t forget about them.

To some, the answer to this question may seem obvious – yes! Of course!

Both anecdotal evidence as well as academic sources repeatedly show links between age and amount of food waste, favouring older populations as wasting less.

It is interesting to consider just why this occurs.

Historically, there hasn’t always been the abundance of choice that we enjoy today when it comes to food purchasing and consumption. Many from older generations grew up in times of food scarcity and rationing. Any, even minor, food waste in this context simply did not occur. Creative cooking techniques, the re-imagination of leftovers and a healthy appetite were all employed in the name of food waste mitigation and making the most of what was available.

Several qualitative studies have interviewed seniors about their feelings on food waste. Despite now living in times of relative food abundance, the important lessons regarding the value of food and the importance of avoiding food waste have become life-long habits. In some studies, participants reported feeling that wasting food was a sin and that witnessing food waste was anti-ethical to how they live (Cohenmansfield et al., 1995; Palacios-Ceña et al., 2013). Food waste for these individuals elicited feelings of regret, embarrassment and guilt (Graham-Rowe, Jessop, & Sparks, 2014). For them, food was clearly viewed as a privilege and not something not to be squandered.

Since our views on food are strongly influenced by our unique history and experiences, living through food insecurity had clearly left an impression on these individuals. Perhaps if the overwhelming notion in modern-day society was that food waste is anti-ethical, we wouldn’t be faced with a food waste problem of this scale. In fact, some sources argue that food waste is a contemporary issue that historically stems from a shift away from food scarcity to food abundance (Hebrok & Boks, 2017).

Of course, the solution to the food waste problem is certainly not widespread food scarcity. However, if we were to experience food rationing in our modern-day context, it is likely that our perceived value of food would increase and thus, food waste may be reduced.

In summary, my question is this: Can the growing food waste problem in North America at least partly be explained by perceived food abundance? And does this perception of abundance contribute to a reduced valuing of food, which subsequently results in food waste?

When you think of food waste, do you immediately consider its environmental consequences?

Generally speaking, consumers do not often make the connection between wasted food and wasted natural resources. However, when we step back and consider the problem more carefully, the environmental rationale for reducing food waste becomes clearer.

Evidence shows that food waste is indirectly accompanied by a wide range of negative environmental impacts including soil erosion, deforestation, water scarcity and air pollution, to name a few. Furthermore, the actual processes involved in producing and transporting food from farm to fork generate a great deal of greenhouse gas emissions (Schanes, Dobernig, & Gözet, 2018). The total contributions of greenhouse gas emissions from food waste to global warming have been estimated to be almost equivalent to the output of global road transport emissions (FAO, 2011)!

Ultimately, the production and transportation of food is highly resource-intensive. Of course, this is done with good reason: everyone needs to eat.

However, if food is wasted by households at the end of the supply chain, all of the various agricultural inputs, energy and greenhouse gas emissions put into its production, processing, transportation, cooling and preparation are in vain. Unfortunately, 50% of total food waste is in fact generated at the household level. So how do we help households make the connection between food waste and negative environmental consequences?

Research shows that adding to the already abundant messaging about climate change may not be entirely effective. Recently, warnings and dire messages about the environment are fairly omnipresent. So much so, that we may be suffering from what some sources refer to as “global warming fatigue,” whereby the sheer number of messages results in less meaningful communications (Hebrok & Boks, 2017).

Few would disagree that they could do a little bit more to help out the planet. Although many of us recognize the importance of reducing our carbon footprint and being kinder to the planet, perhaps being surrounded by constant warnings may result in an overall reduced impact.

This leaves us with several questions as food waste researchers. The most pressing perhaps to investigate is whether or not the environmental rationale for reducing food waste should be a focus of educational campaigns.